Rhetoric of Place
Overview ''' In the context of Writing Across Media, the Rhetoric of Place is the argument that the location in which we receive a message directly impacts how that message is received and evaluated. In this sense, the place in which the message exists is considered a defining characteristic of the message itself. '''Definition and History ' '''The Rhetoric of Place has been the interest of scholars only in the most recent decades. When analyzing images, multimodal texts, and other forms of representation, scholars often placed an emphasis on time. This time-centric focus was considered a superior form of analyzing social and cultural conditions because it provided for specificity and particularity of individual cases. However, scholars have begun to fully realize the impact “place” has on rhetorical discussions within the last few decades. With the further compression of time and space resulting from globalization and emerging technologies, many scholars realize place is losing its specificity even further. The establishment of capitalism broke down previous spatial barriers that previously contained specific customs and traditions unique to that place. In recent decades, scholars have begun to analyze the impact of ‘place’ more critically, suggesting that this rhetoric has more to offer than initially meets the eye. Scholars such as Philip Wander, McKerror, and Michael McGep were some of the first to conceive the notion of place as a tangible artifact. This group argues that despite being concrete structures, “Spaces have ideologies tied to them that influence our experience in them.” CITE For instance, the capitol building of the United States is not only a mark of architecture brilliance; it serves as a symbol of power and attests to our western heritage (columns, marble stone appearance). Therefore, any activity that takes place there, automatically assumes on a political tone and is affected by the significance of the location itself. In multimodal composition it becomes necessary to understand the place and context in which a message is received. Since places have a significance beyond their structure of tangible building blocks, it becomes essential to incorporate that significance within the wider meaning of a message. The effect place has on an image is one example of how context possesses the ability to influence messages that exist within it. Thus, when composing or attempting to analyze multimodal compositions, a recognition of where the message is received must be considered. For instance, a crucifix placed in a church hall would be no surprise. The purpose of the hall is to further a religious ideology which is represented by this symbol. Therefore, the two are in harmony. However, if the same crucifix was to be placed in a spa, the same image may come off as offensive and perhaps morbid. While this case is a hyperbole in the goal of illustrating a point, it becomes plain to witness how the site of reception alters an image and its relationship with the viewer. While there has been increased attention give to the rhetoric of place, scholars who study the topic believe there must be more reseach. With the altering notions of both space and place, it becomes necessary to understand how these newly defined spaces alter our perecptions in the world and the messages in it. '''Critical Conversation ' As Doreen Massey said regarding place, “To represent, one must understand and to understand, one must experience” CITE At the very root of their function, Multimodal compositions serve to represent ideas and are often bent to a certain ideology. Many scholars have struggled in the attempt to make definite distinctions in the definition of place versus the definition of spaces. As mentioned above and reaffirmed by Massey, space was seen as as something beyond a specific place. Space offered an endless realm of possibilities and expansion. However, scholars like David Harvey have recognized that in the last century, the compression of time and space requires further emphasis in studying place. He believes that a new emphasis on the rhetoric of place has two motivational factors to consider. Firstly, the security of places has been compromised since capitalism. Secondly, diminished transportation costs and incredible advances in transport technology have allowed the free exchange of ideas. While Harvey’s article was published in the mid 1990’s, I am confident that he would now include the emergence of the world wide web as another catalyst for the free exhance of ideas, globally. With these changes in mind, the difference between space and place can become confusing. With traditional spatial barriers being torn down as the result of globalization, space has been loosing its infinity as the world grows smaller and place has lost its specifity, now open to all. The innate complexity of defining ‘place’ compounded with the ever-changing structure of place has challenged scholars to define this rhetoric succinctly. As David Harvey describes, “Place has to be one of the most multi-layered and multi-purposed words in our language.” This is because place is an interactive element in our lives. We do not simply exist and place, but rather, we behave and alter in specific ways unique to specific places. In analyzing the ideological impact war memorials have on the visitors, Endres and Senda-Cook argue that “Place is a rhetorical phenomenon. Insteaed of merely arguing that people make meaning from places through discourse, we argue that places, imbued with meaning and consequence, are rhetorical performance.” In this perspective, place is an active contributor to the experience we have in it. As a result the information we receive in the place interacts with the place itself. In “Place of Public Memory,” scholars Dickinson, Blair, and Ott examine the relationship between rhetoric, memory, and place. Again, this relationship assigns place as an active and interactive element in experiencing and analyzing messages. The group points out specific sites of memory that communicate powerful ideologies simply by what has happened at that place. For instance, Ground Zero and Disney World each take on specific and mutli-layed connotations. The events that occurred in a location effect how that location is received, and in turn, how the people visiting will experience the information in that place. Place serves as the context in which information is relayed to a viewer and received. The affordances of place lie in their ability to reconstruct memory in a tangible manner while ultimately creating an intangible experience of that place. As these scholars argue, place has a definition that is rapidly changing and is ever-evolving. However, what remains constant is the effect space can have on its viewers. Rather than simply being a background to the events of our lives, place serves as the context in which we experience our lives. It is not a passive element of our existence, but is an interactive playground with which we communicate and receive ideas. Those ideas are altered depending on the place and context in which the message was received. Since we can never divorce ourselves from being it a space, it becomes necessary to understand how it shapes our perception both outward in the world and inward in our ideologies and beliefs. Keywords Rhetoric Graffiti Geographic Rhetoric Remediation Space/Place Globalization Citations Dickinson, Greg, Carole Blair, and Brian L. Ott. Places of Public Memory: The Rhetoric of Museums and Memorials. Tuscaloosa: U of Alabama, 2010. N. pag. Print. Endres, Danielle, and Samantha Senda-Cook. "Location Matters: The Rhetoric of Place in Protest." Quarterly Journal of Speech 97.3 (2011): 257-82. Web. . Harvey, David. "From Space to Place and Back Again: Reflections on the Condition of Postmodernity." Mapping the Futures: Local Cultures, Global Change. London: Routledge, 1993. N. pag. Print. Matthew, Tom. "Essay on Place." TomMatthew.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Nov. 2014. Category:Keyword